A genuine question regarding the dog in S2

Why were people so offended by leaving that dog to die? I mean, I left it to die because I was pissed off at it, and what it tried to do to Clem, but even afterwards I didn't feel any remorse at all for it. In my eyes, if is stayed normal as it saw me handing food over to it, I would have given him the can.

Again, no offence to any animal rights activists or whatever.

Comments

  • Dunno. If it wasn't so thin I could skin him and eat.

  • Eh, I'm not a vengeful person, there was no need to leave him there to suffer more than he had to.

    He was gonna die anyway.

    It's just that people see leaving the dog there as a lack of mercy.

  • I was thinking about eating the dog before I found that can.

    StarPony posted: »

    Dunno. If it wasn't so thin I could skin him and eat.

  • Morals. The dog was a bit untame after being without an owner for an unknown amount of time and Clementine tried to take its food away(which a lot of people know can cause even very kind dogs to bite, though usually not as violent as the one between Sam the dog, and Clementine). You can also choose not to give Sam any of the beans and he still attacks you, I guess for trying to keep food from him. I think that is a little bit realistic too, but keep in mind he was pretty skinny and likely very hungry.

    In the end, he was very hungry and Clementine tried to keep food from him(even when that wasn't her intention, the dog probably didn't know that), so he attacked her. He also looked pitiful and was suffering afterwards. Plus a lot of people are dog lovers. So that is why a lot of people kill him out of mercy for those varying reasons.

  • Couldn't of said it better. :)

    Morals. The dog was a bit untame after being without an owner for an unknown amount of time and Clementine tried to take its food

  • edited February 2014

    This is one area where Americans truly follow in the British tradition:

    "That's one thing you have to remember about WASPs: they love animals and hate people" - Gordon Gecko

  • No idea really. Dogs are rather common enemies in computer games, for example in 1992 game Wolfenstein 3D you can shoot dogs or stab them with a knife. There was controversy surrounding the game in Germany, however it wasn't because of the dogs, but because of swastikas.

  • I saw it as the dog trying to take Clem's food. To me it was the dog version of a bandit.

    Morals. The dog was a bit untame after being without an owner for an unknown amount of time and Clementine tried to take its food

  • I don't hate animals or people....generally. Though there are a lot of horrible people in the world, while animals just try to survive.

    Sarangholic posted: »

    This is one area where Americans truly follow in the British tradition: "That's one thing you have to remember about WASPs: they love animals and hate people" - Gordon Gecko

  • DeceptioDeceptio Banned
    edited February 2014

    I didn't leave the dog to die. That's just messed up. Just because you're pissed off at it doesn't mean it deserves to suffer like that. I mean look at his stomach, he was so skinny and he was starving, so it was reasonable why he attacked Clem. Although I understand why people can just be extremely pissed and want to do something right there on the spot without even hesitating to think. But then after a while, you begin to realize, "What did I just do?" Come on, that's happened to all of us at least ONCE in our lifetime.

  • That's quite different. The dog doesn't know the extent of his actions, all he sees is a human keeping food from him while he's starving to death. A bandit knows exactly what their doing, how much the people they steal from need the supplies and how much they are hurting people, physically and mentally. Bandits aren't trying to survive, they're trying to thrive, and by the most crooked way possible. I have no reason to believe the dog was going around stealing from and killing people. He's not the dog version of a bandit.

    But yes, he was trying to take the food that Clementine found, that is a valid point and that, on top of the fact that he attacked and tried to kill Clementine, is valid reasoning to kill him out of anger or leave him to die painfully. It's certainly not right, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", but it's reasonable to have a lot of anger towards the dog after it tries to take your food and kill you.

    I saw it as the dog trying to take Clem's food. To me it was the dog version of a bandit.

  • edited February 2014

    Does she look like the one to leave a dog to suffer impaled on a spike?

    Alt text

  • No, that's young Clem. She's changed!

    Does she look like the one to leave a dog to suffer impaled on a spike?

  • I'd choose a random dog as a friend over a random person any day. Mental instability comes with intelligence, and while it may seem there is a lot of the first, it is often caused by the latter.

    Sarangholic posted: »

    This is one area where Americans truly follow in the British tradition: "That's one thing you have to remember about WASPs: they love animals and hate people" - Gordon Gecko

  • edited February 2014

    For better or for worse? I don't want Clementine to stop caring about things.

    Alt text

    Deceptio posted: »

    No, that's young Clem. She's changed!

  • Well put.

    For better or for worse? I don't want Clementine to stop caring about things.

  • I killed him cause he was suffering i just can imagine the pain he was feeling and it wasnt even humane to even understand what he did he just did it for instinct you cant blame him. I dont think people were offended they nly thougth i was cruel to let him suffer like that

  • Man's capacity for evil can stretch to extreme limits: Doctor Mengele, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin...

    I don't want to see Clem's capacity.

    Viva-La-Lee posted: »

    Well put.

  • The dog was obviously going to attack Clem when she found the food...

    If his family died a long time ago and he has been alone he has gone kind of feral, so he will fight for every little piece of food even if Clementine decides to share, he's no longer a pet he's an animal trying to survive and when a leopard hunts down a zebra he carries it to the top of a tree so he can have it all to himself, evne if he can't eat it alone... That's how animals work

    SO it's sad to not kill Sam, because he was acting on his Natural insctins and I guess he really liked Clementine for the time thye were together

  • Agreed, I'd go with the dog as well.

    Viva-La-Lee posted: »

    I'd choose a random dog as a friend over a random person any day. Mental instability comes with intelligence, and while it may seem there is a lot of the first, it is often caused by the latter.

  • With some of the choices in E1 she could well be on her way to making that list :p

    But really I just couldn't see her leaving that dog, she isn't evil (or quick to such evil actions (I'm going to catch some flack for using 'evil')). At least, that isn't how I view Clem.

    Man's capacity for evil can stretch to extreme limits: Doctor Mengele, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin... I don't want to see Clem's capacity.

  • Yes, she does. :D

    Because Clem is playable character it's not written to stone how she should behave. Some people play her in a kind-hearted way, where she keeps her morals even if it's gonna hurt her and the group. Others have much more cynical style and they like to play Clem the way where she is following the footsteps of Carl (comic book version) and becoming a perfect survivor in the new post-apocalyptic world. Most people are probably somewhere between these extremes.

    Personally I killed the dog. Not because I pitied it, but because I thought that it's noise could attract walkers.

    Does she look like the one to leave a dog to suffer impaled on a spike?

  • Don't act like you know what's going on inside a fake dog's head.

    That's quite different. The dog doesn't know the extent of his actions, all he sees is a human keeping food from him while he's s

  • But I do. It's fairly obvious, their intentions are all but directly stated. The dog was starving, as shown by him being skinny. He was very nice and kind towards Clementine for the most part until he saw she was trying to keep food from him. It is fairly obvious, if you want to argue against that, fine, but it's still obvious.

    It's easy to tell because they wanted it to be easy to tell. Telltale wanted people to know why the dog attacked Clementine so they would feel bad about killing it but bad about leaving it, and for most people, my self included, it worked. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what the dog's thoughts and reasoning were when that was Telltale's intention.

    Don't act like you know what's going on inside a fake dog's head.

  • LOL no.

    But I do. It's fairly obvious, their intentions are all but directly stated. The dog was starving, as shown by him being skinny.

  • I guess you're out of valid points to argue with and have resorted to simply disagreeing with nothing to back your statement up.

    LOL no.

  • I really only needed the valid points I already brought up to realize this conversation was going no where. I'm not going to convince you that you're not the video game dog whisperer, and you're not going to convince me that you are. You can have your opinion and I can have mine.

    I guess you're out of valid points to argue with and have resorted to simply disagreeing with nothing to back your statement up.

  • Fine, we'll agree to disagree then I guess. Though I leave you with one last point. Telltale likes giving out the feels, making it obvious the dog was desperate and had reasoning for attacking is a VERY good way to give out the feels, regardless of if it was Telltale's intention or not.

    I really only needed the valid points I already brought up to realize this conversation was going no where. I'm not going to conv

  • Yeah for sure. I don't know if it was obvious the dog was desperate, it never really crossed my mind. I was kind of busy trying to keep Clem safe. Like I said up in this thread earlier I was thinking about eating the dog before I found that can so I was ready to knife it long before I had to. He was being way too loud and didn't really do a damn thing for Clem so it didn't strike me as a character I needed to keep around. I wasn't gonna just leave it squirming on those spikes though, I'm not a monster.

    Fine, we'll agree to disagree then I guess. Though I leave you with one last point. Telltale likes giving out the feels, making

  • edited February 2014

    You know what I find almost sick about this is the statistics of who left Andy to live, knowing he was about to be devoured by zombies with his entire family dead, yet felt bad for a dog that just attacked Clementine for no reason other than its own selfish reason to survive. Dogs know how to live in packs, they understand basic principles of sharing and so it was the dogs own fault and its own decision to attack clementine. And yet, 80% of people spared Andy, in possibly a worse state than the dog, as he had once had a family, a life and people he cared about that you recently just murdered. You had just destroyed a mans life and you just left him there to die. On the other hand, you had just taken some canned beans from a dog, and yet feel so bad for him you mercy kill. I honestly find this rather awful in fact, that people treat animals that only act on instinct, better than other human beings who you were almost friends with a few hours ago.

    That's just my opinion though :)(I wish we could have signatures so that I wouldn't have to add that at the end each time lol :D)

  • The way I saw it, if Clem has to suffer walking around with a ghastly wound, then the dog gets to suffer with it's ghastly wounds.

  • edited February 2014

    That's a really good point :D. And even though the dogs wounds were fatal, so were Clementines! If the group hadn't rescued her she would have been killed by those zombies or likely died of an infection.

    Thematt9001 posted: »

    The way I saw it, if Clem has to suffer walking around with a ghastly wound, then the dog gets to suffer with it's ghastly wounds.

  • That is a survivalist-ish attitude, less moralistic. It's fine, but it's not the most common attitude people have when playing this game(Clearly, since most people killed the dog). The dog could have provided things for Clementine(perhaps not as much for your Clementine who is likely a survivalist and less moralistic and emotional, based off your above comment), like companionship and protection. Sadly that's not the way things went for Clementine and Sam. xD

    Yeah for sure. I don't know if it was obvious the dog was desperate, it never really crossed my mind. I was kind of busy trying

  • Yeah my Clem is dead inside.

    That is a survivalist-ish attitude, less moralistic. It's fine, but it's not the most common attitude people have when playing th

  • But that's the player's choice since you're the one taking control of her now. I myself still have her caring for things. But don't mind wanting to manipulate people if they think she can't take care of herself.

    For better or for worse? I don't want Clementine to stop caring about things.

  • I seriously don't understand WHY people find this such a strange scenario. Isn't it just morally the right thing to end that dog of his suffering? It even puzzles me that some people didn't kill him.

    Like leaving a dog to suffer just because he pissed you off? That's a horrible thing to do in general. Doing that really defines how you see your Clementine. Do you really want to develop her character to be completely bitter and emotionless to the extent of selfishness? If so fine, but I still don't want my Clem to become that in my playthrough. Hardened yes, but still have some of the optimistic hope I had when I controlled Lee. Only thing I've SLIGHTLY changed with Clem is the fact I don't mind manipulating people now. The moral tie of her being the moral compass is broke now since you're controlling her. But I still try to (for the most part) do the better thing. And that dog one just feels like common sense to me. Leaving a dog to die is a horrible thing to do.

  • No, my Clementine isn't cold normally, it's just this one moment I just let go and let the dog suffer, because as someone pointed out Clem had to go through the same pain without getting help. It isn't really my fault the dog tried to kill me, why should I try to help it die quicker when if it was the other way round the dog would have attacked Clem, steal her food then go along its way without thinking of Clem?

    Btw, I didn't down vote your comment.

    CathalOHara posted: »

    I seriously don't understand WHY people find this such a strange scenario. Isn't it just morally the right thing to end that dog o

  • I cam't lie, I still haven't felt that way about the dog, and I still would leave it like that for attacking me first. Maybe it will attract walkers, maybe other people will find it and eat it. Not my problem.

    Deceptio posted: »

    I didn't leave the dog to die. That's just messed up. Just because you're pissed off at it doesn't mean it deserves to suffer like

  • Eh...

    I cam't lie, I still haven't felt that way about the dog, and I still would leave it like that for attacking me first. Maybe it will attract walkers, maybe other people will find it and eat it. Not my problem.

Sign in to comment in this discussion.